Ball in No Play Zone?

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

We have a newly dug ditch running across a fairway. The ditch is curved with a plank bridge crossing each end of the ditch. Red posts are at the bridges ends of the ditch, but no intermediate posts - to define a Penalty Area. Temporarily we want the whole ditch/PA to be a No Play Zone until the ground and grass mature. There are no lines between posts marked - it would be difficult to mark and maintain them. A straight line between the posts either end of either side of the ditch does not define the edge of the ditch. The break point from fairway level both sides into the ditch is currently not consistent along the length of the ditch as things and nature mature the ditch.

How should players address the question of whether or not their ball is in the ditch/NPZ. Player integrity and agreement?

 

[Steven Rules]

I see a number of diminsions to this.

For the duration of this settling and grow-in stage, the club needs decide whether this new area is to be a penalty area, or whether to just treat it as general area. I vote for the latter - more on that below.

Next remove ambibuity about the definition of the edge. "Player integrity and agreement" rings alarm bells everywhere, not because of a lack of integrity but because of inconsistency in interpretation.

If it is a penalty area, what is so hard about putting some red posts down to define the edge of the penalty area? The defined edge of the penalty area doesn't need to follow the ground contours. Even a single judiciously placed intermediate red post mid way between the two end posts will remove doubt.

The alternative to properly marking the penalty area is to rely on the provision in the definition:
"When the edge of a body of water is not defined by the Committee, the edge of that penalty area is defined by its natural boundaries (that is, where the ground slopes down to form the depression that can hold the water)." Relying on this is often problematic and nothing in your initial description indicates that it would be any less problematic in this specific situation.

My recommendation would be to ignore the penalty area aspect for the time being and mark the whole area as GUR/NPZ in the general area. Yes, it's a free pass for people who land in there during this interim period, but it is easy to administer and reduces cofusion.

It's what we did at our place recently. We created a new penalty area but in the early months after the excavation and planting it was general area/GUR/NPZ. After a number of months it took on it's final status as a penalty area.

From my experience, the average club golfer struggles to correctly apply the Rules for NPZ within a penalty area.

Whichever way the club goes, though, don't rely on player judgement and agreement. Remove any ambiguity or uncertainty.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I see a number of diminsions to this.

For the duration of this settling and grow-in stage, the club needs decide whether this new area is to be a penalty area, or whether to just treat it as general area. I vote for the latter - more on that below.

Next remove ambibuity about the definition of the edge. "Player integrity and agreement" rings alarm bells everywhere, not because of a lack of integrity but because of inconsistency in interpretation.

If it is a penalty area, what is so hard about putting some red posts down to define the edge of the penalty area? The defined edge of the penalty area doesn't need to follow the ground contours. Even a single judiciously placed intermediate red post mid way between the two end posts will remove doubt.

The alternative to properly marking the penalty area is to rely on the provision in the definition:
"When the edge of a body of water is not defined by the Committee, the edge of that penalty area is defined by its natural boundaries (that is, where the ground slopes down to form the depression that can hold the water)." Relying on this is often problematic and nothing in your initial description indicates that it would be any less problematic in this specific situation.

My recommendation would be to ignore the penalty area aspect for the time being and mark the whole area as GUR/NPZ in the general area. Yes, it's a free pass for people who land in there during this interim period, but it is easy to administer and reduces cofusion.

It's what we did at our place recently. We created a new penalty area but in the early months after the excavation and planting it was general area/GUR/NPZ. After a number of months it took on it's final status as a penalty area.

From my experience, the average club golfer struggles to correctly apply the Rules for NPZ within a penalty area.

Whichever way the club goes, though, don't rely on player judgement and agreement. Remove any ambiguity or uncertainty.

That’s really useful. A bit more background if that might change things a bit.

Since its creation maybe a year ago the ditch has been defined as a PA as water will often flow along it (why the ditch was created). It’s been dry for some months.

But as the sides and base weren’t maturing as we’d hoped (due to the very dry weather) the club some few weeks ago laid an irrigation pipe along the base of it with sprinklers to irrigate sides and base of the ditch. We put in place a LR that tried to define the immediate vicinity of the irrigation pipe as NPZ within the PA, but this has caused great confusion as you suggest would happen, and so has now used rule 17.1e to define all of the PA as a NPZ (the NPZ around the pipe impeding shots from the PA). Since its creation the ditch PA has been defined as where the ground starts to slope down, also as you have noted for your own place. But that isn’t good enough for the moaning Minnie’s of my place . And personally I’m not a great fan of red marker posts positioned across a fairway, maybe one intermediate post might be OK.

Given the MMs point out that the uncertainty over the edge of the PA/NPZ may or may not result in a shot penalty, I will suggest discarding the PA for the time being and make it GUR/NPZ. Reluctance to do so by the club might be down to the ditch being a very significant factor in (longer) players not going for the green in 2…the hole is a low SI 540yd par5 and the ditch is about 80yds from the middle of the green. With dry fairways the ditch is in range for many players. Maybe we will keep it as a PA/NPZ until after the club champs end of this month, and the summer KO comps are done.

Many thanks again for your time answering.

ETA..thinking further I have to check whether the intention in the long term is to have the ditch as a PA or not…why would we bother defining a transverse ditch and wet weather watercourse as a PA…. It may be that we defined a temporary PA between the bridges to accommodate the NPZ in the proximity of the irrigation pipe and sprinklers.

 

[salfordlad]

The area could be simply marked by using paint on the ground and if you are okay with calling it NPZ/GUR for a while there is no need to be too finicky about the painted line location, options include using only a dashed line or intermittent dots to limit time and resource cost of maintaining it for this interim period.

 

[jim8flog]

As per Stephen Rules

When there are no posts present to define a penalty area which is a water course /pond or similar. The R&A say you should state the area that defines the edge of the penalty area is the point at which the land slopes away to form the depression that contains the water.

We use this on one of our holes because posts are often washed away in the floods or simply get stolen.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

As per Stephen Rules

When there are no posts present to define a penalty area which is a water course /pond or similar. The R&A say you should state the area that defines the edge of the penalty area is the point at which the land slopes away to form the depression that contains the water.

We use this on one of our holes because posts are often washed away in the floods or simply get stolen.

This how the Penalty Area is defined (with the NPZ now being the totality of the PA). I spoke with our golf manager (ex pro) and he and our handicaps sec (also a qualified ref) debated long and hard what to do…and their preference was to keep the penalty area element of the ditch, for the reasons I suspected and described. They also tested balls rolling along the fairway towards the ditch at many points along it, and almost none stopped short and in a debatable position. The last yards of the fairway as ditch is approached slope very gently down to it and their is nothing to stop the ball dropping in if they get within these last few yards. In practice it is a non-issue.

 

[salfordlad]

This how the Penalty Area is defined (with the NPZ now being the totality of the PA). I spoke with our golf manager (ex pro) and he and our handicaps sec (also a qualified ref) debated long and hard what to do…and their preference was to keep the penalty area element of the ditch, for the reasons I suspected and described. They also tested balls rolling along the fairway towards the ditch at many points along it, and almost none stopped short and in a debatable position. The last yards of the fairway as ditch is approached slope very gently down to it and their is nothing to stop the ball dropping in if they get within these last few yards. In practice it is a non-issue.

On this updated info, it is clear that the club wants the ditch to be PA, and for the duration of the settling in period of the new work to be NPZ (PA). All that remains is to clearly mark the edge. Given this ground is curved and cuts across the line of play, by far the cleanest approach is to put paint on the ground so there can be no confusion and consistent application of the Rules.

As per Stephen Rules

When there are no posts present to define a penalty area which is a water course /pond or similar. The R&A say you should state the area that defines the edge of the penalty area is the point at which the land slopes away to form the depression that contains the water.

We use this on one of our holes because posts are often washed away in the floods or simply get stolen.

There is a slight misunderstanding here - the R&A is not saying clubs "should" state the edge of the PA is where the land slopes away etc, clubs are free to define the edge how they wish. And it is very common for the edge to be marked outside (wider than) the natural boundaries. BUT: a) if the club fails to mark an edge, then the Rules provide an answer - the edge is defined by the natural boundaries, where the edge slopes down etc; and b) if a club incorrectly marks the edge inside (narrower than) those natural boundaries, then the Rules override the club markings and have any marked edge that is inside the natural boundary edge revert to the natural boundary edge. (And in that latter world, things get ugly as many players are likely to be confused and misled.)

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

On this updated info, it is clear that the club wants the ditch to be PA, and for the duration of the settling in period of the new work to be NPZ (PA). All that remains is to clearly mark the edge. Given this ground is curved and cuts across the line of play, by far the cleanest approach is to put paint on the ground so there can be no confusion and consistent application of the Rules.

There is a slight misunderstanding here - the R&A is not saying clubs "should" state the edge of the PA is where the land slopes away etc, clubs are free to define the edge how they wish. And it is very common for the edge to be marked outside (wider than) the natural boundaries. BUT: a) if the club fails to mark an edge, then the Rules provide an answer - the edge is defined by the natural boundaries, where the edge slopes down etc; and b) if a club incorrectly marks the edge inside (narrower than) those natural boundaries, then the Rules override the club markings and have any marked edge that is inside the natural boundary edge revert to the natural boundary edge. (And in that latter world, things get ugly as many players are likely to be confused and misled.)

BIB…Our Golf Manager stated that for (more important) competitions - club or otherwise - it’s likely we’d mark the ground…and so I expect to see that done for our club champs end of month.

But as noted…he and the handicaps sec determined through trial that they feel that there’s only a very outside chance of a ball stopping on the edge of the ditch and so little chance of an In/Out debate taking place.

 

[D-S]

BIB…Our Golf Manager stated that for (more important) competitions - club or otherwise - it’s likely we’d mark the ground…and so I expect to see that done for our club champs end of month.

But as noted…he and the handicaps sec determined through trial that they feel that there’s only a very outside chance of a ball stopping on the edge of the ditch and so little chance of an In/Out debate taking place.

Can you see the ditch from a distance? If not, then posts seem the fairest solution as there is nothing worse than a blind (as you can’t see the paint on the ground until you are close) ditch with no clear markings as to where it goes.

 

[rulefan]

We have a newly dug ditch running across a fairway. The ditch is curved with a plank bridge crossing each end of the ditch. Red posts are at the bridges ends of the ditch, but no intermediate posts - to define a Penalty Area. Temporarily we want the whole ditch/PA to be a No Play Zone until the ground and grass mature. There are no lines between posts marked - it would be difficult to mark and maintain them. A straight line between the posts either end of either side of the ditch does not define the edge of the ditch. The break point from fairway level both sides into the ditch is currently not consistent along the length of the ditch as things and nature mature the ditch.

How should players address the question of whether or not their ball is in the ditch/NPZ. Player integrity and agreement?

How long is the area and how many significant changes in direction are there? The comment from D-S makes sense. Stakes at each end and direction changes. Line of site normally works. For 'important' competitions involving a referee, they would always be carrying a line.

 

[salfordlad]

Can you see the ditch from a distance? If not, then posts seem the fairest solution as there is nothing worse than a blind (as you can’t see the paint on the ground until you are close) ditch with no clear markings as to where it goes.

Posts and lines may well be the optimal combination - the posts would simply be marking, the lines defining.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Can you see the ditch from a distance? If not, then posts seem the fairest solution as there is nothing worse than a blind (as you can’t see the paint on the ground until you are close) ditch with no clear markings as to where it goes.

Yes…you can see it clearly after your tee shot as the fairway slopes gently down towards it from about 250yds off the tee - indeed it’s easy to zap it with a laser…

The ditch directly traverses the fairway (at right angles to direction of play)..it is basically a single curve with the nearest point of curve to play (apex) being pretty in the middle of the fairway. We could put a post at the apex of the curve but that isn’t going to add anything (and one could stop a ball going into the PA) as we can see the ditch very clearly from a distance. Only a few of our longest hitting members can carry it, many though don’t bother and lay up, as a safe layup leaves a wedge of about 100yds at most.

I think we’ll add lines for such as our club champs end of month.

 

[jim8flog]

On this updated info, it is clear that the club wants the ditch to be PA, and for the duration of the settling in period of the new work to be NPZ (PA). All that remains is to clearly mark the edge. Given this ground is curved and cuts across the line of play, by far the cleanest approach is to put paint on the ground so there can be no confusion and consistent application of the Rules.

There is a slight misunderstanding here - the R&A is not saying clubs "should" state the edge of the PA is where the land slopes away etc, clubs are free to define the edge how they wish. And it is very common for the edge to be marked outside (wider than) the natural boundaries. BUT: a) if the club fails to mark an edge, then the Rules provide an answer - the edge is defined by the natural boundaries, where the edge slopes down etc; and b) if a club incorrectly marks the edge inside (narrower than) those natural boundaries, then the Rules override the club markings and have any marked edge that is inside the natural boundary edge revert to the natural boundary edge. (And in that latter world, things get ugly as many players are likely to be confused and misled.)

I had a constant/ongoing discussion with our greens manager and club manager about this. They kept putting the posts well below the point where the the ground sloped towards a weir pool. *
My two arguments were

1. How can you be sure a ball was lost in the 'water area' (common occurrence) to use the ball lost in such rule, the grass was often very long in that area for a couple of yards before the posts

2. One of the reasons the post keep getting washed away is because they are being placed in area where rapid flow of water occurs when we have periods of heavy rain (water levels can rise by several feet in the pool)

* A hole where the ground slopes towards the pool less than 145 yards from the tee.

 

[rulefan]

Yes…you can see it clearly after your tee shot as the fairway slopes gently down towards it from about 250yds off the tee - indeed it’s easy to zap it with a laser…

The ditch directly traverses the fairway (at right angles to direction of play)..it is basically a single curve with the nearest point of curve to play (apex) being pretty in the middle of the fairway. We could put a post at the apex of the curve but that isn’t going to add anything (and one could stop a ball going into the PA) as we can see the ditch very clearly from a distance. Only a few of our longest hitting members can carry it, many though don’t bother and lay up, as a safe layup leaves a wedge of about 100yds at most.

I think we’ll add lines for such as our club champs end of month.

Would a visitor know there was a PA there without a stake (or stakes)?
What are the chances of a ball hitting the stake (particularly if it is in the centre of the fairway ) ?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Would a visitor know there was a PA there without a stake (or stakes)?
What are the chances of a ball hitting the stake (particularly if it is in the centre of the fairway ) ?

The stakes marking either end of the PA/NPZ are obvious from a long way out, and visiting societies are provided with LRs including that for the ditch.

Yes…not a lot of chance of a ball hitting a stake.

 

[rulefan]

The stakes marking either end of the PA/NPZ are obvious from a long way out, and visiting societies are provided with LRs including that for the ditch.

Yes…not a lot of chance of a ball hitting a stake.

Just red line(s) and a notice indicating NPZ (and LR) then

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Just red line(s) and a notice indicating NPZ (and LR) then

Would seem to be obvious and easy…but for some reason it’s not considered necessary or whatever. The ‘whatever’ is probably that is very unlikely that a ball will not end up in the ditch/NPZ if it goes anywhere near it…so the need to define the edge of the ditch/NPZ is not there.

 

[rulie]

Would seem to be obvious and easy…but for some reason it’s not considered necessary or whatever. The ‘whatever’ is probably that is very unlikely that a ball will not end up in the ditch/NPZ if it goes anywhere near it…so the need to define the edge of the ditch/NPZ is not there.

If you’re not going to define it further than by the red stakes, then you should state that the red stakes only indicate that there is a penalty area present, ie, they do not define the edge of the penalty area. As you have described it, the edge of the penalty area is a straight line between the stakes. IMO, since playing from a NPZ is a severe penalty, it should be clearly marked.

 

[salfordlad]

Would seem to be obvious and easy…but for some reason it’s not considered necessary or whatever. The ‘whatever’ is probably that is very unlikely that a ball will not end up in the ditch/NPZ if it goes anywhere near it…so the need to define the edge of the ditch/NPZ is not there.

That is among the dumbest justifications for not marking a significant obstacle clearly that I have ever heard. Failure to mark clearly is an inexcusable screw up by any Committee that purports to take the Rules seriously.

 

[Steven Rules]

They also tested balls rolling along the fairway towards the ditch at many points along it, and almost none stopped short and in a debatable position. The last yards of the fairway as ditch is approached slope very gently down to it and their is nothing to stop the ball dropping in if they get within these last few yards. In practice it is a non-issue.

Posts #1 and #3 are telling us that the edge of the penalty area is not well defined. The Club seems to be saying that, in practice, the nature of the slope is such that balls are highly unlikely to come to rest in that area of "no man's land" where there is doubt or debate about the location of the edge of the penalty area.

For the time being, let me leave aside that aspect of the poorly defined edge of the penalty area and move on to another implication of a poorly defined edge of a penalty area.

If the edge of the penalty area is poorly defined, how can a player (or the Committee) be confident that the player has selected the correct reference point when taking penalty relief from the penalty area?

(Remembering that the reference point for penalty area relief is where the ball last crossed the edge of the penalty area, it seems to me that knowing the location of the edge of the penalty area would be an essential element of determining the reference point.)